ArticleInternational urogynecology journal2020
Effect of investigative laparoscopy on bladder pain syndrome: a prospective cohort trial.
Article in International urogynecology journal, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Analysis of the diagnostic value of peripheral blood immune inflammatory indicators of female bladder pain syndrome.Frontiers in surgery · 2025Article
- Impact of chronic pelvic pain and painful bladder syndrome on the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index on women with deep endometriosis: a cross-sectional study.International urogynecology journal · 2023Article
- Peripheral, Central, and Cross Sensitization in Endometriosis-Associated Pain and Comorbid Pain Syndromes.Frontiers in reproductive health · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
introduction and hypothesisChronic pelvic pain is a debilitating condition, and establishing both an etiology and a successful management plan is challenging. Bladder pain syndrome (BPS) is one such etiology, with some studies reporting a prevalence of up to 50% in women with chronic pelvic pain (Van De Merwe et al. Eur Urol 53: 60-67, 2008; Cervigni and Natale Int J Urol 21: 85-88, 2014). This study aimed to assess the impact that investigative laparoscopy with treatment of endometriosis has on bladder pain syndrome in women with and without endometriosis.
methodsA prospective cohort study was conducted with participants recruited from a tertiary gynecology unit and the private rooms of participating gynecologists. Women included were those scheduled for laparoscopy for investigation of pelvic pain of > 6 months, aged 18-40 years. Each patient completed a preoperative questionnaire, and a standardized study operative report was used to collect laparoscopy findings. Any endometriosis found was treated with excisional surgery. Patients were then reviewed with the same questionnaire at 3, 6 and 12 months post-surgery.
resultsA total of 150 patients were included in the trial. Seventy-five percent of patients (n = 112/150) were diagnosed with endometriosis. Of them, 43% (n = 48/112) also had BPS. The overall BPS rate was 43% (n = 64/150). At 12 months, there was a significant reduction in overall pain and pelvic pain in all groups. Of the women with BPS, there was no difference in symptom score reduction between those with endometriosis treated and those without endometriosis. BPS resolved in 42% of women 12 months post-laparoscopy, regardless of whether endometriosis was diagnosed and treated or not. Of the women without BPS preoperatively, 14% developed de novo BPS at 12 months, regardless of whether endometriosis was diagnosed and treated or not.
conclusionOur findings show that BPS improves in the 12 months after investigative laparoscopy and treatment of endometriosis for chronic pelvic pain, regardless of presence or absence of endometriosis.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.